Misuses of the discovery process include, but are not limited to, the following:
§ 2023.010.Conduct subject to sanctions
Title 4. Civil Discovery Act · Chapter 7. Sanctions · Last amended 2026 · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceSection 2023.010 defines what the discovery statutes mean by a misuse of the discovery process, offering a non-exhaustive list that includes pursuing objectionable discovery without justification, ignoring proper procedures, imposing undue burden, refusing to respond, raising meritless objections, giving evasive answers, disobeying a court order, and failing to meet and confer in good faith.
Full Text of § 2023.010
(a) Persisting, over objection and without substantial justification, in an attempt to obtain information or materials that are outside the scope of permissible discovery.
(b) Using a discovery method in a manner that does not comply with its specified procedures.
(c) Employing a discovery method in a manner or to an extent that causes unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense.
(d) Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.
(e) Making, without substantial justification, an unmeritorious objection to discovery.
(f) Making an evasive response to discovery.
(g) Disobeying a court order to provide discovery.
(h) Making or opposing, unsuccessfully and without substantial justification, a motion to compel or to limit discovery.
(i) Failing to confer or to attempt to confer, in person, by telephone, or by videoconference with an opposing party or attorney in a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve informally any dispute concerning discovery, if the section governing a particular discovery motion requires the filing of a declaration stating facts showing that an attempt at informal resolution has been made.
Plain-English Summary
This section opens the sanctions chapter by naming the conduct the rest of the chapter is built to punish. The list runs from the obvious, disobeying a court order to provide discovery, to the subtler, using a discovery method in a way that technically ignores its required procedure, or pressing an objection the objecting party has no substantial justification for making. The introductory phrase, "include, but are not limited to," keeps the list open rather than closed, so conduct not named here can still count as a misuse if it fits the same pattern of obstruction or bad faith.
The last item on the list carries particular weight in practice: failing or refusing to confer, in person, by phone, by videoconference, or otherwise, in a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve a discovery dispute informally before running to court. Many discovery statutes require a declaration confirming that attempt before a motion can even be filed, and this section is what makes skipping that step a sanctionable misuse in its own right, one that Section 2023.020 backs with a mandatory monetary penalty. Several other items on the list carry a "without substantial justification" qualifier, a phrase that reappears throughout this chapter as the standard a party can point to in order to avoid a sanction otherwise called for.
Frequently Asked Questions
What conduct counts as a misuse of the discovery process under Section 2023.010?
Examples include pursuing discovery outside its permissible scope without justification, ignoring a discovery method's required procedure, imposing undue burden or expense, failing to respond to discovery, raising a meritless objection, giving an evasive response, disobeying a court order, and failing to meet and confer in good faith before a discovery motion.
Is the list of misuses in Section 2023.010 exhaustive?
No. The section says misuses "include, but are not limited to" the items listed, leaving room for other conduct that fits the same pattern.
Can a party avoid a sanction by showing a good reason for its conduct?
For several of the listed misuses, yes. The section conditions sanctionable status on the absence of "substantial justification," a standard Section 2023.030 uses again when setting the default rule for monetary sanctions.
Does failing to confer before a discovery motion count as a misuse under this section?
Yes, when the governing motion requires a declaration showing an attempt at informal resolution and that attempt was not made in good faith.
Can the parties meet and confer by videoconference instead of in person?
Yes. The section recognizes an in-person meeting, a telephone call, or a videoconference as acceptable ways to satisfy the meet-and-confer requirement.
Amendment History
(Added by Stats.2004, c. 182 (A.B.3081), § 23, operative July 1, 2005. Amended by Stats.2025, c. 200 (A.B.1521), § 13, eff. Jan. 1, 2026.) WESTLAW © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 § 2023.010. Conduct subject to sanctions, CA CIV PRO § 2023.010
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the West's Annotated California Codes / Thomson Reuters. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 29, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: ccp 2023.010 misuse of discovery processdiscovery sanctions california list of conductmeet and confer discovery motion requirement